RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Acute surgical units (ASU) are increasingly being adopted and in our system are staffed by colorectal and non-colorectal general surgeons. This study aims to evaluate whether surgeon specialization was associated with improved outcomes in perianal abscess. METHODS: Patients with perianal abscess admitted to the ASU between 2016 and 2020 were identified from a prospective database and their medical records reviewed. Patients with IBD, treatment for fistula-in-ano within the preceding year, or perianal sepsis of non-cryptoglandular origin were excluded. Patients admitted under an ASU colorectal (CR) consultant were compared with those under a non-CR general surgeon in a retrospective cohort study. Primary outcome was perianal abscess recurrence. For those without initial fistula, hazard of recurrent abscess or fistula was analysed. Multivariable Cox PH regression analysis was performed. RESULTS: Four-hundred and eight patients were included (150 CR, 258 non-CR). The CR group more frequently had a fistula identified at index operation (34.0% versus 10.9%, P < 0.0001). However, Cox multivariable analysis found no difference in hazard of recurrent abscess between groups (HR 1.12, 95% CI 0.65-1.95, P = 0.681)). Abscess recurred in 18.7% CR and 15.5% non-CR. Subsequent fistula developed in 14.7% in both groups. For patients without initial fistula, there was no difference between groups in hazard of recurrent abscess or fistula (HR 1.18, 95% CI 0.69-2.01, P = 0.539). CONCLUSION: Surgeon specialization was not associated with improved outcomes for ASU patients with perianal abscess, albeit with potential selection bias. CR surgeons were more proactive identifying fistulas; this raises the possibility that drainage alone may be adequate treatment.
RESUMO
Importance: There are discrepancies in guidelines on preparation for colorectal surgery. While intravenous (IV) antibiotics are usually administered, the use of mechanical bowel preparation (MBP), enemas, and/or oral antibiotics (OA) is controversial. Objective: To summarize all data from randomized clinical trials (RCTs) that met selection criteria using network meta-analysis (NMA) to determine the ranking of different bowel preparation treatment strategies for their associations with postoperative outcomes. Data Sources: Data sources included MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane, and Scopus databases with no language constraints, including abstracts and articles published prior to 2021. Study Selection: Randomized studies of adults undergoing elective colorectal surgery with appropriate aerobic and anaerobic antibiotic cover that reported on incisional surgical site infection (SSI) or anastomotic leak were selected for inclusion in the analysis. These were selected by multiple reviewers and adjudicated by a separate lead investigator. A total of 167 of 6833 screened studies met initial selection criteria. Data Extraction and Synthesis: NMA was performed according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) reporting guidelines. Data were extracted by multiple independent observers and pooled in a random-effects model. Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary outcomes were incisional SSI and anastomotic leak. Secondary outcomes included other infections, mortality, ileus, and adverse effects of preparation. Results: A total of 35 RCTs that included 8377 patients were identified. Treatments compared IV antibiotics (2762 patients [33%]), IV antibiotics with enema (222 patients [3%]), IV antibiotics with OA with or without enema (628 patients [7%]), MBP with IV antibiotics (2712 patients [32%]), MBP with IV antibiotics with OA (with good IV antibiotic cover in 925 patients [11%] and with good overall antibiotic cover in 375 patients [4%]), MBP with OA (267 patients [3%]), and OA (486 patients [6%]). The likelihood of incisional SSI was significantly lower for those receiving IV antibiotics with OA with or without enema (rank 1) and MBP with adequate IV antibiotics with OA (rank 2) compared with all other treatment options. The addition of OA to IV antibiotics, both with and without MBP, was associated with a reduction in incisional SSI by greater than 50%. There were minimal differences between treatments in anastomotic leak and in any of the secondary outcomes. Conclusions and Relevance: This NMA demonstrated that the addition of OA to IV antibiotics were associated with a reduction in incisional SSI by greater than 50%. The results support the addition of OA to IV antibiotics to reduce incisional SSI among patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery.
